CL test patent laws formal apology by Alan Wilton

Genetic Testing - CL test DOES NOT contravene patent laws formal apology by Alan Wilton

Quoting From: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

10 Apr 2006

Subject: Genetic Technologies Limited (GTG)'s CL test DOES NOT contravene patent laws

Genetic Technologies Limited (GTG)'s CL test DOES NOT contravene patent laws

Retraction of statements made about GTG and formal apology.

Quoting From: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

10 Apr 2006

I, Alan Wilton, wish to unreservedly apologise to GTG and any associated parties, for any damage to their reputation caused by the statements made by me on this list on 10th May. Some of the statements are inaccurate or poorly worded and may give the wrong impression. I would like to retract those statements that GTG feels are defaming. My statements have misled others who have repeated them or inadvertently forwarded them onto this site and I apologise on their behalf.

As the discoverer of the CL mutation I have filed a provisional patent application and am in the process of preparing the full specification for the CL test that follows from this discovery.
Genetic Science Services (GSS), a subsidiary of GTG, is also offering the CL test and my comments were questioning the rights
of GTG to offer the test without entering a licensing agreement for the test.

I have been informed that, until such time as a patent has been issued, anyone, including GTG, has the right to offer the CL test without entering a licensing agreement and they are only liable for fees on these tests when and if the patent is issued.

I have further been advised by GTG that they are free to undertake CL tests on any dog located anywhere in the world until such time as the Australian patent has issued.

So my statement that GTG is contravening patent law is incorrect and I unreservedly apologise to GTG for making the statement.

The offering of the test without paying the licence fee cannot be considered stealing from research as I stated. GTG has the right to offer the test without a licence until the patent is issued.
What they are doing is not illegal. The term stealing cannot be applied to GTG actions and is totally inappropriate. I apologise to GTG for making the statement and for the false impression I may have given people by making it.

I also wish to advise that GTG has informed me that despite having no obligation to pay license fees, they will, in accordance with the commitments made on their website, continue to voluntarily pay a license fee of $10 per CL test they conduct. These funds will be used to fund future research into diseases affecting Border Collies.

In closing, I would urge all members of the canine industry to work with companies such as GTG to promote the health and well being our canine companions.

Sincerely

Alan Wilton

Alan Wilton
School of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences
University of New south Wales
NSW 2052

Phone +61 2 9385 2019
Fax + 61 2 9385 1483
Mobile 0422 736 425